Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-06-12-Speech-3-199"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-06-12"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Enlargement of the Union2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020612.5.3-199"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-06-12-Speech-3-2002
lpv:speaker	lp:Véronique Mathieu Houillon2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (2002-01-17--2002-06-30)3 member; EDD (2001-07-05--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Estonia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2002-09-17)3 unknown; Chasse, Pêche, Nature, Traditions (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; PETI (2002-01-17--2002-06-30)3 member; AGRI (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Enlargement is a great challenge that can only be met if all the players are ready. I regret to say that this is far from being the case at the moment, particularly in the agriculture sector. We want to integrate countries in which agriculture and exports are very important into the European Union, even though they have not to date adopted the Community acquis. The Sapard programme has effectively failed and its future prospects are slim as certain countries will be unable to fulfil their cofinancing responsibilities. At the moment, the farmers are worried. Some of them, from both Member States and candidate countries, came to tell us this yesterday, and we must listen to them. The candidate countries are afraid that the process of modernising agriculture might destabilise the rural economy. They are opposed to the Commission proposals with regard to both direct payments and setting quotas. Farmers in the Member States cannot agree to seeing their products rivalled by products that do not comply with the same health or environmental requirements. In asking for transition periods, the candidate countries have acknowledged their difficulties, yet what will happen if the objectives of protecting biodiversity and fauna are added to the agricultural constraints prior to accession? In this context, it is difficult to assess the success of enlargement. Exceeding the financial perspectives will not solve this. I ask you, what purpose would be served by favouring a timetable? Therefore, let us be sensible and take the time to create the conditions necessary for successful accession. By acting hastily, as is being proposed, we could ruin agriculture in both the Member States and the candidate countries. Lastly, in Mr Olsson’s report, I cannot support item 24, as I reject the idea of turning our farmers into gardeners and riding instructors, as it stipulates. Our smaller farms participate fully in and are essential to production diversity, supply and rural development. I think it is important, however, to emphasise item 20, which reminds the Commission of the need to develop other activities in rural areas."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph